Abuse or tough love? This one factor determines how employees view their bosses

Boss yelling at employees (Photo by Yan Krukov from Pexels)

Columbus, Ohio – Imagine working for a boss who is harsh, critical and demanding. Sounds terrible, right? But what if, under certain circumstances, some employees viewed such a boss not as an abuser, but as “tough love”? A recent study in Organizational behavior and human decision-making processes looks at this fascinating phenomenon and explores what influence a leader’s performance can have on whether they are perceived by their employees as an abuser or simply as a demanding but effective leader.

The standout finding from this research is that high-performing leaders who practice abusive leadership are less likely to be labeled as “abusers” and more likely to be viewed as “tough love” bosses. This shift in perception is critical because it influences how employees respond to their leaders’ behavior and can affect overall workplace dynamics.

“These bosses may treat their employees unkindly, but their intention is probably to help their employees reach their potential – that’s the ‘tough love’ part,” said study co-author Bennett Tepper, a professor of management and human resources at Ohio State University, in a press release.

“And when leaders perform at their best, it indicates that they are succeeding in bringing out the capabilities of their employees.”

methodology

The researchers, led by RB Lount Jr., conducted two main studies: a field study and a laboratory experiment.

The field study involved 576 full-time employees from a variety of industries in the United States. The survey was administered in three waves over several weeks. Participants, all of whom had supervisors, provided data on their experiences with abusive supervision, their supervisors’ performance, and their perceptions of those supervisors. The survey measured abusive supervision using an established 15-point scale and rated supervisors’ performance using a 4-point scale.

The laboratory experiment involved 168 participants who were exposed to manipulated conditions of leadership performance and abusive supervision. Participants received either abusive or neutral messages from their supervisors and then rated the perceived abusiveness and performance of those supervisors. This controlled environment allowed researchers to test the causal relationships between abusive supervision, leadership performance, and the resulting labels.

The results: abuser or tough love?

The results of both studies converged on an intriguing point: a leader’s performance significantly moderates the relationship between abusive supervision and the labels assigned to a leader.

The field study showed that when the leader performed well, abusive leadership was less likely to result in labeling as an “abuser” and more likely to result in labeling as “tough love.” Conversely, when the leader performed poorly, abusive leadership was more likely to result in labeling as an “abuser.”

The laboratory experiment supported these findings. Participants were less likely to perceive high-performing leaders as abusers and more likely to see them as “tough love” bosses, even when those leaders exhibited abusive leadership. This suggests that high performance can mitigate the negative perceptions typically associated with abusive behavior.

“We have found that the abusive labeling of a high-performing boss can be significantly reduced in a very short period of time,” says Lount.

“Just knowing that your team performed better because of your manager’s assessment significantly reduced the willingness to label that person as abusive – even though your manager made exactly the same statements as the other managers who were labeled as abusive after subpar performance.”

Study restrictions

While the results are compelling, the study has some limitations. For example, the artificial environment of the laboratory experiment may not fully capture the complexity of real-world workplace dynamics. In addition, the field study relied on self-reported data, which may be biased.

Another limitation is that the study focused primarily on supervisor performance as a moderating factor. Other characteristics such as charisma or intelligence could also influence how abusive leadership is perceived. Future research could examine these additional factors to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon.

Discussion & Insights

So what do these findings mean for workplaces and leadership? The study highlights the power of perception in leadership. How employees view their leaders can significantly influence their response to leadership styles. A high-performing leader can get away with behaviors that would otherwise be considered unacceptable simply because their performance puts them in a more favorable light.

For companies, these findings mean that investing in performance-enhancing leadership training can help mitigate some of the negative effects of a harsh leadership style. However, this does not mean that abusive leadership should be tolerated. Rather, it highlights the importance of performance and competence in leadership roles.

“The bosses who get away with their abusive behavior may be the ones who somehow manage to achieve high performance despite their behavior,” Tepper concludes.

“Her high performance protects her from the consequences, because even her employees say he is a ‘tough love’ type of boss.”